Site Search Navigation

Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Mitt’s Mushy Moment

By Frank Bruni August 31, 2012 12:13 amAugust 31, 2012 12:13 am

TAMPA, Fla.

Having coached a “Million Dollar Baby,” Clint Eastwood helped to set the stage last night for a Multi-Million Dollar Daddy, and had he done a coherent or even audible job of it, it would have been a risky gambit. How was Mitt Romney of all politicians supposed to outshine a legend?

And how was he supposed to turn the most calculated moment of his presidential campaign into an assurance that he’s less calculated—more genuine, approachable and empathetic—than many voters believe? It wasn’t a speech he strode onto the stage here to deliver. It was a miracle.

And it was, in the end, almost beside the point. He won’t win this election on the strength of his evanescent humanity or the wattage of his fugitive charisma or any of that lovely, squishy stuff. He’ll win this election—if he does—on the numbers: the percentage of Americans who are unemployed; the percentage of Americans who think the country is on the wrong track; the percentage of Americans who can’t afford the things they could four years ago, when they entrusted their welfare to Barack Obama.

“You know there’s something wrong with the kind of job he’s done as President when the best feeling you had was the day you voted for him,” Romney said in one of his speech’s most targeted and telling lines. He wants voters to measure how they were doing in November 2008 and how they’re doing now. And to make their decision based on that.

‘Humanization’ isn’t Romney’s path to victory. A few more disappointing jobs reports are.

Because a convention is predominantly emotion and atmospherics, those of us who describe and analyze it tend to focus on the frippery. So do the candidate’s handlers. If they can gain significant ground with spiffy one-liners, gauzy anecdotes, snazzy stagecraft and some aggressive tugging at heartstrings, they certainly want to. And they’ll certainly try. They’ll tug for all they’re worth.

They did last night. In came Marco Rubio, speaking of his immigrant parents’ struggles to give him a better life.

Up went a video in which Romney reflected on his marriage to Ann and his family life. “I can’t explain love,” he said. “I don’t know why it happens. I don’t know why it endures.”

Romney’s Mormonism emerged from the shadows, with testimonials from fellow churchgoers, including a woman who remembered his concern for her sick daughter.

She also remembered a day when Romney dropped by to say hello, spotted clothes that had been hung to dry, and spontaneously began to fold them. “By the time Mitt left,” she said, “my laundry was done.”

Romney mentioned his religion, saying that in Michigan, where he grew up, his Mormonism “might have seemed unusual or out of place.” He separately mentioned the way his father gave his mother a rose every day. His eyes repeatedly welled with tears. On the stage last night, a candidate who needed to be “humanized” was wet with humanity.

But I’m not sure how much ground Romney, soggy or not, stood to gain on that front. He’s probably never going to match Obama’s likeability. He’s definitely never going to match the historic arc and emotional resonance of Obama’s political career, one that validated the American dream in a special way and suggested crucial progress in racial reconciliation. And he’s unlikely to persuade Americans that he’s better connected to their everyday problems, not with his offshore accounts and off-kilter way of talking about his wealth.

“Humanization” isn’t Romney’s path to victory. A few more disappointing jobs reports are.

In an ABC News/Washington Post poll taken over three days just before the convention began, 61 percent of registered voters said that Obama was the friendlier and more likeable candidate; only 27 percent said Romney was. That’s a staggering spread.

And yet 47 percent said that they supported Romney, while 46 percent said they favored Obama. What explains that? Well, only 29 percent of registered voters said that the country was headed in the right direction, while 69 percent said it was on the wrong track.

That puts Obama in a worse position than George W. Bush in August 2004, when one survey showed a right direction/wrong track split of 36 to 50.

And it will matter more than Clint Eastwood talking to an empty chair (what was that about?) or Romney talking about roses or a fellow churchgoer talking about his laundry prowess or Ann Romney, in her speech on Tuesday night, trying to tenderize him, as if he were London broil.

From the beginning of Romney’s campaign, his advisers conceded that if the 2012 election turned into a popularity contest, he’d lose. But in a referendum on Americans’ economic welfare, he had a solid shot at victory.

That remains the case. And the smartest and most powerful parts of Romney’s speech weren’t those torn from a family scrapbook or ripe for a Hallmark card.

They were the ones that took stock of the promises Obama made, the hope Americans felt, the economic reality four years ago, the economic reality now. Romney’s bottom-line pitch is this: if you’re better off today, then Obama may well be your man. If you’re not, then stop worrying about who feels your pain and give someone new a chance to relieve it.

What's Next

About Frank Bruni

Frank Bruni has been an Op-Ed columnist for The Times since June 2011. Before then, he was the newspaper’s restaurant critic, wallowing in sushi and pseudonyms; as its Rome bureau chief, he kept tabs on an ailing pope (John Paul II) and a flailing prime minister (Silvio Berlusconi). He has been a White House correspondent and, for The Detroit Free Press, a movie critic. Many of those experiences are captured in his best-selling memoir, “Born Round” (2009).

This blog harnesses his diverse interests and invites you into a discussion with him. As Frank weighs in on news, culture and a whole lot else, sharing quick thoughts and riper reflections, you’re encouraged to do the same. More about Frank Bruni »

Moderating your missives and helping with this blog is Lindsay Crouse, an editorial assistant for the Op-Ed section. The more civil and on-point your comments and feedback are, the faster she can speed them into this space.

Archive

My 2009 memoir tells the story of my exuberant, obsessive and sometimes debilitating relationship with food, from childhood through five years of professional eating. It's a spirited look at the loving, feasting ways of a big Italian-American family and one glutton's search for self-acceptance.